Hacker News Reader

Comment by intrasight | Hacker News Reader

Exactly. The court isn't saying you can't moderate out the cesspool posts. They are saying that you can't choose political sides.

View on HN

Where did they say you can't choose a side? It's also possible that I moderate content, the majority is conservative, and I'm not choosing a side.

Every decision is inherently "political"

Exactly, grey zones can happen really quickly. For example if someone says "I think Candidate X from Party Y is a total a-hole." Is that a political statement or a cesspool comment? I see legitimate arguments for either.

And this is why the us supreme court will throw out this appellate ruling. They really don't like grey zones.

> For example if someone says "I think Candidate X from Party Y is a total a-hole." Is that a political statement or a cesspool comment?

That's not even remotely gray, it's both a political statement and a "cesspool comment"; you're suggesting a false dichotomy.

Whether or not pineapple on pizza is acceptable can technically be brought to a political argument but anyone not turned into a rage monster by current social media can tell that it isn't a political debate in the current environment.

Perhaps in the technical definition of political, but not in the layman's definition of political.

The definition of political used by the populace is almost always the narrow subset of societal/cultural fights that are actively being argued. Generally speaking these arguments are headed by politicians.

There is also a space in the definition for arguments directly impact the structure/scope of the government. Although this may be separate enough that it may warrant being considered a second definition instead of an additional category within the first definition.

I often see this sentiment associated with those who wish to regulate political speech they find offensive. It's convenient if everything is political so that everything said can be regulated.

Regulating political speech for whatever reason (including offense), should be considered a legitimate exercise of moderation. It happens on Hacker News all the time - political speech is only considered on topic if and when it contains evidence of a "new or interesting phenomenon," and even then, users will mod down anything they don't like. And given the quality of most political threads here, I don't think many people here would prefer it if that were allowed to run amok.

If I'm running a car forum, I should be able to ban pro-Nazi rhetoric if I want, regardless of whether I find it offensive or merely technically off topic. Not every space on the internet needs to be /pol/.

Yeah, internet content laws are becoming increasingly conflicting. On one hand, you have places that are making it more difficult to legally moderate websites. On the other, you have legislation like SESTA and FOSTA where websites are being held legally responsible for content that others may post on the website.

Section 230 was an unusually great piece of internet legislation, and it's not great to see it start to crumble with these new changes. Just let every site be its own site.

I think quite literally lots of things are political. This discussion is political. Anything to talk about h1b visa is political. Immigration is political. The most offensive speech is arguably political speech, such as advocating for genocide.

There's a bit of a gap between "everything" and "lots of things" though. I agree with you that lots of things are political, but everything?

Using the widest definition, "affairs of the citizens", it's literally about everything outside of your private home. The twist though, is that since pretty much everything has consequences (including inaction), you are not safe from eventually having an outside impact even there. As the meme goes, "we live in a society". (Also why you should want to keep good relations with the other citizens...)

If you want to sell X to group Y which coincides mostly with party Z and has little overlap with the opposite party, it is worth your while to make buying X a political activity, however you can go about doing that.

I think the only thing that is clearly not political is people sharing pictures of pets. Everything else including Insta Thotts and what have you have been co-opted.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com